John Titor: Hoax

Originally posted by Kano

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
Again, a real person from the future wouldn't categorize information the way we do.

Therein lies the problem, you seem to be obsessed with treating him like a Nostradamus. Instead of a person from the future who has returned.

If it was a person from the future they would know the specifics and be able to give them. Did Titor even ever mention which party won the 2004 elections? I think not. Did Titor give any specifics whatsoever that could be tested? Not really no.

But really, when talking about a 'coming US civil war'. Why would he cite the Palestinian/Israeli conflict as one of the causes for the Civil war, but fail to mention anything about the WTC, or the Invasion of afghanistan/Iraq (Iraq especially) which would have a far greater effect on internal US politics.

Again I point out the lack of any Waco type incidents or Civil unrest in 2004.

He isn't Nostradamus, you can't take his words and twist and turn them to make prophecies, as much as you would like to.

I'm not trying to bend whatver he says into what happened... what I'm saying is that what people insist are 'contradictions' are not actually that. These are only contradictions if you believe that everything that happens in the world fits some sort of mechanistic pattern that is determined by ideology. Many JT debunkers fail to acknowledge that their perspective of the world may not be the one generally agreed upon in 2036. It may turn out that people in 2036 consider the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to be a cause of the war (Israel can be said to inspire terrorists, for instance). Looking back over the decades, that struggle may loom large than 9-11.

Also, it must be pointed out that neo-cons pushed for the invasion of Iraq, partly, as a way to protect Israel. So, in retrospect, the israeli-palestinian conflict may be seen as a cause for the Iraq invasion.

As for details... why WOULD he mention the parties and names? He repeatedly stated that he wasn't here so as to give betting tips for people... he also said that he wouldn't give info that could allow people to benefit monetarily. His stated goal, instead, was to comment on overall lifestyle decisions people were making. In particular, he repeatedly talked about mad cow and its variants. So... if you were a time traveller form the future, and millions had just died because of disease and nuclear war, would you comment on the lifestyle choices that led to those problems or what, in retrospect, was a small side war a few years before a nuclear holocaust.

If there's going to be a "John Titor Exposing the Hoax project", there needs to be a "Fallacies of the JT Expose Project". I'm serious. But I'm not volunteering because once I start I can't stop and that wouldn't be a good thing.

Oh right, so he wasn't able to give proof of his claims, simply because he didn't want people to gamble?

9-11 and the War on Terror have been the world focus for the last 3 years. It appears that it will be like that at least for a few more years to come. Why would Titor, arriving less than a year before 9-11. Not mention it AT ALL? He and his parents would HAVE to remember it, whether there was a bigger war afterwards or not. Why mention the Palestinian/Israeli issue and Mad Cow disease (both of which were occuring at the time). Yet not even a hint of the War on Terror, nor the invasion of Iraq. He pretty much says the palestinian/israeli conflict is a contributing factor to civil unrest in the US. He doesn't say because of this the US invaded middle eastern countries and that causes civil unrest.

Hell why not warn us that there would be a massive terrorist attack on US soil in a little over a year?

Titor does not give specifics, that is what he needs ot be belivable.

Let's see how well I could do as a time voyager (let's say I went back to 1962):

How do you guys share information?
"We read papers and watch television, but we also send information over the telephone lines in the form of images and text."

When was that invented?
"I'm not sure, I think it started as a militart thing in the 1960s."

This phone service you use?
"Well, it wasn't used by civilians until the 90s, but I know a few guys who used something like it before then."

Do we land on the moon?
"Yes, we landed on the moon."

How much does it cost to buy a moon ticket?
"You can't buy a ticket to the moon, we don't fly there."

What problems does your society have?
"Well, many parts of the inner city are riddled with crime. The housing projects have a lot of problems."

What year did crime start to go up?
"In the late 60s/early 70s, I believe"

Do we fight a war with the communists?
"Yes, but not with Russia in russia, though Russians sent a lot of advisors to the actual war."

Which was with someone else?
"Yeah, we fought the communists in asia."

So we went to war with China?
"No, vietnam."

But we've said we won't get involved with the problems there.
"Well, we get into it slowly."

When is war declared?
"It isn't."

So there isn't a war?
"Yes and no, it's an armed conflict that's undecalred."

When does it start?
"Well, it's going on now, in a way, but it doesn't start until 1964, unofficially, still. It, arguably, started in 1954."


--

Now, I've answered every question above as well as I can without giving away info someone could bet on... yet someone in 1962 could say that I was being evasive and contradictory. Their own beliefs might also be used to 'debunk' what I said.

For instance:
1.I couldn't pin down a date for the start of the Vietnam war (which can be said to have many beginnings)
2.In 1962 we were involved in Vietnam, but most americans were unaware of either the involvement or its scope. So... i would be 'lying' by most standards in this regard.
3.Crime and failed social projects... in 62 things like housing projects were seen by many politicians as a necessary step in rehabing cities. My report on their failure might be ignored if it was judged by 1962 values.

Originally posted by Kano
Oh right, so he wasn't able to give proof of his claims, simply because he didn't want people to gamble?

9-11 and the War on Terror have been the world focus for the last 3 years. It appears that it will be like that at least for a few more years to come. Why would Titor, arriving less than a year before 9-11. Not mention it AT ALL? He and his parents would HAVE to remember it, whether there was a bigger war afterwards or not. Why mention the Palestinian/Israeli issue and Mad Cow disease (both of which were occuring at the time). Yet not even a hint of the War on Terror, nor the invasion of Iraq. He pretty much says the palestinian/israeli conflict is a contributing factor to civil unrest in the US. He doesn't say because of this the US invaded middle eastern countries and that causes civil unrest.

he also said that he wouldn't give details that could prevent people from suffering statistical deaths.

So far as israel and all that goes... 1.We invade Iraq because of Israel 2.The domestic situation gets turned upside down by the invasion 3. Civil war is more likely because of that

Historians in his period might not separate the war on terror from the israeli-palestinian conflict. the WoT might be seen as having been caused by that conflict. Just because, in 2004, it's convenient for americans to distance the two doesn't mean that will be the case in 32 years.

Mr. john titor is becoming very popular I found 44, sites that talks about his story of time traveling.

I think now is a very good time to apply Ockham's Razor.
He did, however, say that our timeline was deviating only a few % from his timeline, and considering 9/11, etc, are such major events, I personally believe it would require more than a little bit of deviation for them not to occur in his timeline.
Let us also consider his gravitational field... Why is it not affecting the instructor, etc? If it's strong enough to bend light to that magnitude, then surely it'd be EXTREMELY hard for them to lift their hands, etc, or even manage to stop being crushed to a pancake?!?

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
Historians in his period might not separate the war on terror from the israeli-palestinian conflict. the WoT might be seen as having been caused by that conflict. Just because, in 2004, it's convenient for americans to distance the two doesn't mean that will be the case in 32 years.

Grabbing at straws already? If referring to a wider conflict, what historian would lump it all under the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Which has been sidelined in the wider war on terror.

You don't seem to be getting the point. No mention was made of the terrorist attacks in the US or outside Israel. No mention was made of the Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan by the US. No mention at all.

It didn't have to be something that could cause the avoidance of deaths. He could simply have mentioned a large attack on the US in the coming year. Or the invasion of a middle eastern country. Yet nothing. He says the Palestinian/Israeli conflict induces a civil unrest in the US.

This, coupled with the fact that there has so far been none of the uprisings or Waco incidents that were meant to occur monthly in 2004. ON TOP OF the blatantly fraudelent 'bending light' image. Lead to only one conclusion. Its a hoax, it seems people are already trying to make a religion out of this, clinging to their beliefs in the face of all evidence.

An interesting tale, true or false. Remember that event can happen in a relatively short time, how long was it from 9-11 to the invasion of Afghanistan?

December... so, 3 months perhaps?

of course John Titor would not tell us the dates that the terrorists attack Kano!!! this would CHANGE the ENTIRE future of Titor right??? i mean if Titor told us the dates of main terror attacks then the war on terror would have NEVER occured and then Titor's future would be messed up! do you actualy think that Titor would wanna change his entire future just to save lives or to give proof??? NOPE!!!

P.S. i got this theory from those "back to the future" movies so i could be wrong...

Our time line did not affect his timeline, if I remember his statements correctly, he was saying he already saw our timeline diverge a few percentage away from his one.

Uh, he doesn't have to give specifics TSA, he didn't mention it anywhere.

As far as the rest I suggest you bother to learn a little more about the case at hand and the way in which Titor covers those issues before commenting. Lest you slip and accidentally look foolish.

I read the JT story about 8 months ago now and i feel the same way today as i did then. There is absolutely no way to either fully debunk or fully believe his story. The attack on the world trade can be seen as a direct response to the fact that the united states has repeatedly backed the Israelis. Perhaps in the future the events he spoke of will be exposed as a large underlying factor in the attacks on the trade center. To stick with the vietnam scenario how many people knew we were executing attacks in cambodia? Not many at all. ALSO to tell people about a major death causing event before it happened could cause any number of major problems. Like JT said the war came from the cities and the rural communities. Perhaps if someone who died in the wtc lived he would have led the cities to further kill and destroy. As far as civil unrest goes... i dont know where you live but here in NYC everyday people are taking to the streets and protesting everything from public housing to the president himself. So to say you dont see it is to be blind. But then there are instances like the pictures and some comments which lead one in the other direction. As a time traveler, everything you chose to say can theoretically lead to death and suffering. So the most ethical thing i could see to do is to be vague enough not to sway peoples decision making. Personally i think that if the altrnate worlds theory is correct then time travel if unable to do it with a 100% accuracy is a waste of time because you will never get "home", and it is theoretically impossible on a one world line scenario. (at least i couldnt see it as reasonable. ask if you want my reasoning) My point in all of this is that there is evidence enough to prove both sides... and there is no way to ever know if he really was a time traveler. If a civil war does come to pass perhaps the debunkers will still say he only guessed; which is quite possible. If one doesnt come to pass in so blatant a way as JT proclaimed the believers will say he somehow stopped it. So believe or dont there is no way to fully prove it.

"Time travel is nothing more ... than a greedy man's folly"

Vir Fidelis

Originally posted by Kano
Uh, he doesn't have to give specifics TSA, he didn't mention it anywhere.

As far as the rest I suggest you bother to learn a little more about the case at hand and the way in which Titor covers those issues before commenting. Lest you slip and accidentally look foolish.

what are you talking about???

i never said he had to give specifics!!!

his timeline is not effected by ours???

how is this???

Oh, too late I guess TSA.

His timeline is a different timeline to ours, ours is just very similar. (Within 1-2% if I recall according to his story).

Now TSA, this is not a thread where we teach you about Titor, if you wish to comment bother to go and read the material posted in abundance on ATS and a myriad of other places around the web. At least bother to learn the fundamentals of a topic before commenting.

Again, in Titor's world the 9-11 attacks are to the civil war what the Reuben James incident would be to WW2 or Pearl harbor. Even within the context of his story, it shouldn't be expected that he would mention the attacks... because it would seem like one small incident among many incidents in his history.

Right now 9-11 is the biggest thing on our minds, but that, again, my not be the case in 2036. It might be lumped together with Khobar, USS Cole, Embassy bombings... stuff like that. In the end the WoT might just be seen as a sideshow that only was one of many things that led to the civil war.

Aero, all good points, and on the basis of the lack of comment regarding the War on Terror alone, you are correct. It is not possible to absolutely show that he is a hoax from missing out those topics.

It does however, make the chances of him being for real drastically smaller. Again, he mentions all sorts of bits and pieces, yet he never mentions the largest terrorist attack in history or the entire War on Terror, with all its subsequent attacks and invasions. Doesn't mention any of it. Even when he arrives only a year before it begins. Strongly suggesting that he was unaware of it, and therefore hoaxing.

Even still, there is that slight chance that he is still real. Hell, theres even a slight chance that I am a machine sent back from the future to debunk him.

But, when we take that on top of the fact that his predictions about 2004 have not come to pass. As well as the fact that his light bending picture (his 'proof' of the gravitational field) is so massively flawed. The chances of him being for real rapidly approach zero.

The really sad thing is that the people who are making a choice to believe in this, will tie themselves to the theory so strongly. That if the perpetrator was to actually come out now and admit to the hoax, wishing to claim the 'greatest hoaxer' crown. They would not believe him. Instead wishing to cling to their romanticised tales of a time traveller named John Titor.

Incidentally, if I was to guess at the identity of the Hoaxer, I would have to go with an idea I read somewhere that it might be a Science Fiction author. Although barring an admission I doubt we will ever know. If only the staff/members of the boards he visited were a little more on the ball and had found out at the time.

Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
Right now 9-11 is the biggest thing on our minds, but that, again, my not be the case in 2036.

Yes, and it was going to be the biggest thing in the world for the next 4 years after he visited. Yet he didn't mention it at all. Instead mentioning 2 things that were already happening when he posted. Mad Cow and the Intifada. Neither of which has even come close to the size or scope of the War on Terror. Why would he mention those things in relation to our near future yet not the War on Terror?